Happy New Year 2008!

Goodbye 2007, Hello 2008!

See you on the other side!

Hoosier God?

During our recent holiday visit to Indiana, I saw lots and lots of Hoosier license plates. It turns out, you can get a wide variety of plates sponsoring many different organizations and interests.

For example, if you support the Lions Clubs, for $40 extra, you can get this plate:

If you support your University, for $40 extra, you can get a plate like this:

Or you can get the standard plate for no extra charge:

Finally, you can also get this plate FOR NO EXTRA CHARGE*:

*Blatant religious message sponsored by the Indiana government and the taxpayers.

Like all the other special interests plates, if people could pay extra for such a plate, that would be fine. I know that if I buy the Lions Club plate or the Boy Scouts plate, I'm donating part of the fee to those organizations and advertising my support. While choosing the "In God We Trust" plate doesn't donate to any group, it is an endorsement of a special interest - religion. There are no free plates with other slogans such as "E Pluribus Unum", "Separation of Church and State", or even "Wherever you go, there you are". (Rhetorical question alert.) Why does religion get a free advertisement?

Plus, some license branches are apparently pushing the "In God We Trust" plate, making it the de facto plate unless you specify that you don't want it.

Something's rotten in the state of Indiana.

Pixar In-Jokes

If you are a fan of Pixar's films, you know that the studio often inserts Easter Eggs and In-Jokes. That is, references, both subtle and obvious, to past and future Pixar films.

This page has a wonderful list along with screen images of many of these in-jokes, including some I had never seen. Check it out.

After demons, C.H.U.D.'s are next!

Well, if you needed any further evidence that the Pope (and the Catholic church) is out of touch with reality . . .

The Pope has ordered his bishops to set up exorcism squads to tackle the rise of Satanism.

Vatican chiefs are concerned at what they see as an increased interest in the occult.

They have introduced courses for priests to combat what they call the most extreme form of "Godlessness."

Each bishop is to be told to have in his diocese a number of priests trained to fight demonic possession.

The initiative was revealed by 82-year-old Father Gabriele Amorth, the Vatican "exorcistinchief," to the online Catholic news service Petrus.

"Thanks be to God, we have a Pope who has decided to fight the Devil head-on," he said.

"Too many bishops are not taking this seriously and are not delegating their priests in the fight against the Devil. You have to hunt high and low for a properly trained exorcist.

Now tell me why we should listen to the Pope's opinion on ANYTHING?

A Taste of Waterboarding

PZ over at Pharyngula posted a link to a guy who waterboarded himself to see what it's like.

If you've been following the whole torture debate and the Bush Administration's insistence that waterboarding isn't torture, you should check this out. Yi-ikes.

Too sensitive?

My friend Judy sent me this link about a student who tore pages out of a Bible during a class presentation. The story is rather confused as it focuses on one girl who felt "threatened" by the demonstration. The article and video don't describe the incident in much detail or even reveal if the boy was punished. Neither gives the boy's perspective or that of other witnesses.

I have never felt threatened like that in a classroom before," said Jacobson.

The 17-year-old is talking about an incident in her English class two weeks ago during a class presentation.

"This boy got up and his visual aid was a Bible and a book. And he got up and started his speech by saying 'Now, this piece of crap' and pointed to the Bible."

Jacobson said that she quickly felt threatened.

"He took the Bible and he said, 'I'm going to do this because I can. I'm going to do something that your stupid, little minds aren't going to be able to comprehend and he took the Bible and started ripping out pages."

While the language used by the boy is somewhat aggressive (and keep in mind this is from her recollections and is thus not necessarily what happened), why would she feel "threatened"? Possibly some Christian persecution complex? Many Christians have heard so often that Christians are being persecuted, they see it everywhere. Certainly, he wasn't respecting Christianity, but was he threatening anyone in the room? As for God, shouldn't an omnipotent being be able to handle someone ripping up "His" book?

School officials said that they know about the incident.

"We take this extremely seriously," said Dr. Karen Schulte, Janesville School District safety and security coordinator.

Officials said that they will not confirm whether the boy was suspended.

"We do an assessment of this situation and students involved to ensure the safety of every student and staff at that school," said Schulte.

Officials said that ripping up a Bible is constitutionally protected, adding the punishment has nothing to do with the student's Freedom of Speech demonstration.

"Any actions that were taken in this case were because of behavior separate from the Bible," said Parker High Principal Dale Carlson.

To their credit, the school is being fairly neutral here. They haven't condemned the boy publically and sound like they're just trying to calm down some extremists. It seems likely that they're being forced to act and are trying to make this go away.

But they wouldn't confirm whether or not he was suspended? Why would he be suspended at all? If the ripping of pages is admittedly Constitutionally protected, what warrants punishment? There's not enough information here to explain so it's possible there was additional behavior, but if so then it's not about the Bible. It's hard to imagine the boy getting punished if he had been ripping pages out of "Catcher in the Rye".

More facts are needed to see if this event is just hysteria over a free speech issue, but right now it looks like he was right when he said, "I'm going to do something that your stupid, little minds aren't going to be able to comprehend."

Update!: He was suspended. Here are additional details.

Chaos and Uncertainty

The assassination of Benazir Bhutto is not only incredibly tragic, but the chaos is spiraling out of control. They aren't even clear yet as to how she died.

First reports were that she was shot just before the bomb went off. Then there was speculation and, supposedly, confirmation that she was killed by shrapnel from the bomb. At this moment, CNN has a breaking news banner saying that: "Benazir Bhutto died from hitting her car's sunroof; no bullet or shrapnel found in her, Pakistan’s Interior Ministry says." How could that happen?

This whole thing really, really sucks. What the heck is wrong with us humans?

Cognitive dissonance

I was set to go all ranty about the just announced annual poll concerning who Americans most admire. The winners were George W. Bush and Hillary Clinton.

Given the President's low approval rating , dissatisfaction with the war and everything else, it seems amazing to me that he could win dogcatcher, much less "Most Admired." Turns out, there's a simple explanation.

According to Frank Newport, Gallup Poll editor in chief, U.S. presidents typically come in first in this yearly rite, done this month as part of the latest USA TODAY/Gallup Poll.

Bush's support — he was the choice of 10% of 1,011 Americans polled — was the lowest since he took office in 2001 and 2 percentage points above the No. 2 choice, former president Bill Clinton.

So the President won with 10%, meaning the voting was split many, many ways. Makes sense. Of course, it also makes the poll meaningless. But that would never stop the media from announcing it anyway.

This is science . . . and stupidity!

As I was driving last night, I was uncharacteristically searching through the radio channels. Typically I just listen to the same couple of stations but I wanted to find WTOP. I stopped to listen when I came across the start of a segment called something like, "The Science of Creation" and braced myself for the worst.

The narrator was making an argument from design concerning the seasons of the year, the calendar, and time. The argument was that the 24 hour time period of the day is ideally suited to human beings. You see, we need to sleep; isn't it convenient how it gets dark at night? The 23 degree tilt of the Earth is perfect as well for giving us varied seasons (so we can enjoy varied foilage, I guess). One of his main points was that the 365 day year was clearly a number indicative of careful thought. All of this, of course, couldn't happen "by random chance" and so is evidence of design by God. Plus, we get our six day work week directly from God!

Of course, anyone with half a brain will see major problems with this argument. First, none of these numbers is particularly perfect for anything. 24 hours? If designed, why not 20 or 25 hours? Why 365 days of the year rather than 400? Why a seven day week rather than 10? And what about people who have to work every day of the week? All of these seem arbitrary if a product of design. For that matter, why any tilt of the Earth at all? Do we actually need seasons? Many people have survived along the equator with virtually no changes in seasons.

More bizarrely, when discussing the length of the year, the narrator talks about how a year is actually 365 days, 6 hours, 9 minutes and 9.7676 seconds (sidereal). He even discusses how we have to adjust our calendars every four years by inserting a leap day. And somehow, this is more evidence of how perfectly everything is designed. Huh?

There's an obvious and simple answer to this nonsense. The Earth was not designed to accommodate us. We are suited to a 24 hour day because we evolved here on Earth. We are suited to the climate of the Earth because we evolved within that climate. If the conditions of Earth were different, we would be different, perhaps radically so. If our orbit around the sun was different, if the rotational speed of the Earth was different, perhaps we wouldn't have evolved at all. But the conditions of the Earth are what they are and we evolved to live under those conditions. In a puddle, the hole doesn't conform to the shape of the water. The water fills the shape of the hole. It's pretty simple really. (Hint for the slow: In the preceding analogy, human beings are the water.)

I think I'll stick to my regular stations from now on. There's too much of "teh stupid" out there.

Old Onion Graphic = Still Funny

I'm clearing out some old files and I found this old infographic from the Onion. It's pretty funny.

DVD Review: Stardust

At the tail end of summer, a movie called "Stardust" hit the theatres. To say the ad campaign didn't motivate me to see the movie is a huge understatement. The ad campaign convinced me that the movie had two attributes: Harry Potter ripoff and Lord of the Rings ripoff. I didn't go see it.

Last week, John Campea at the Movie Blog was waxing on about the best movies of the year. He listed Stardust and specifically mentioned that the ad campaign was terrible. His description of the movie piqued my interest, so, we rented and watched it last week.

When a movie is well-written, there comes a time, generally within the first five minutes, that the dialogue demonstrates the intelligence behind the script. I always smile when this happens and settle back for a good time. I was very pleased when Stardust had such a moment. The story by Neil Gaiman is not a ripoff of either HP or LOTR, but does have fun with the standard fantasy elements. The cast includes Claire Danes, Michelle Pfeiffer, Robert De Niro, Peter O'Toole, Ricky Gervais, and Ian McKellen.

Holy cow was this a fun movie. The most obvious comparison is "The Princess Bride" and I think if you like that classic, you'll like Stardust. Stardust has loads of humor, most notably a Greek Chorus of ghostly princes watching and waiting for the winner of the battle of succession. The romance is charming, the special effects work for the story, and the tweaking of genre elements is welcome.

If you want a good rental that may become one of those movies you'll watch again and again, check out Stardust. And make sure you check out the deleted scenes for more ghostly-prince goodness.

It depends on what the definition of "prevaricator" is.

Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney is in some controversy over apparently lying about his father's "participation" in a march with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. It appears that, oops, his father didn't march with Dr. King.

Romney said his father had told him he had marched with King and that he had been using the word "saw" in a "figurative sense."

"If you look at the literature, if you look at the dictionary, the term 'saw' includes being aware of in the sense I've described," Romney told reporters in Iowa. "It's a figure of speech and very familiar, and it's very common. And I saw my dad march with Martin Luther King. I did not see it with my own eyes, but I saw him in the sense of being aware of his participation in that great effort."

That's funny because I saw Mitt Romney making a huge ass of himself. I did not see it with my own eyes (I can't actually see him unless I'm wearing my sacred underwear), but I saw him in the sense of being aware that he's a big fat liar.

In Memory - Lance Jones (1921-2007)

My paternal Grandfather died on Saturday, December 8, in his bed. He was a great guy who always had a smile on his face and a joke on his lips. While I tend to be anti-social at times, Grandpa really enjoyed meeting and just talking with people. He raised a large family. He started a business and saw it to success, passing it down to my father and now my brother.

To me, he was the perfect grandfather - funny, kind, thoughtful and caring. I don't ever remember him dealing with me in any kind of anger or even raising his voice. Of course he was the person who taught me to fish.

He was there at all my high school plays and musicals. He was there during Little League. He was there when I graduated from high school, college, and law school. He loved flea marketing and, knowing my love of games, would often return with some board or card game he'd found, giving it to me months later when we visited. Because we live so far away, we didn't see him more than a couple of times a year, but he always had something for me and the family.

When I was a small boy, he delighted in giving me "girly" gifts, including, famously, an Easy Bake Oven. I enjoyed the attention and understood the affection he was showing by teasing me like that. And I loved that oven.

Many people my age haven't had a grandparent in decades. I was very lucky to have him around for almost 43 years of my life. I am especially glad that my kids got to know him and are both old enough that they'll remember their Great Grandpa for the rest of their lives.

Here's the notice.

He doesn't mean to abolish the separation of church and state, it's just a coincidence

This picture is from a recent Huckabee ad in Iowa. I believe Huckabee's denial. I'm sure the image of the cross wasn't noticed by anyone shooting the commercial because people who make political ads are never very image conscious.

Real subtle.

To be fair, it is delicious.

So this guy was consuming colloidal silver and rubbing it on his skin. Consequently, he turned blue.

Obviously, taking this sham treatment was not the smartest thing to do and at least the consequences weren't fatal. I wouldn't even think this worthy of comment given the far greater tragedies that are commonplace in the world of "alternative" medicine, but dang if this guy doesn't look like Papa Smurf.

He looks so much like Papa Smurf it makes me suspicious that this is just a stunt. I mean, if I turned blue, I might dye my hair white and put on some antennae to make people think I was an Andorian, but no way would I dress and groom myself to look like Papa Smurf. I mean, put a red cap on this guy and get out of the way; Gargamel will be after him in a second.

And thus begins the war on Xmas.

You Can't Take Christ out of Christmas

Roland S. Martin has this to say:

This whole push to remove Christ from the Christmas season has gotten so ridiculous that it's pathetic.

Because of all the politically correct idiots, we are being encouraged to stop saying "Merry Christmas" for the more palatable "Happy Holidays." What the heck are "Seasons Greetings"? Can someone tell me what season we are greeting folks about? A Christmas tree? Oh, no! It's now a holiday tree. Any Christmas song that even remotely mentions Christ or has a religious undertone is being axed for being overtly religious. And I'm sorry, forget X-M-A-S. Malcolm X? Yes. X replacing Christ? No.

I have just one question for Mr. Martin:

WHO THE HECK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?!?

Really. Who is trying to take the "Christ" out of Christmas? Who is encouraging people to say "Happy Holidays"? How many people have really started calling Christmas trees, Holiday trees, and who is coercing them to do it? How about some specific examples? Please?

The persecution complex that some adopt this time every year is stupid, stupid, stupid.

Mr. Martin then goes on to decry the capitalist bent of the season, which is certainly an objection that's been made for the last, oh, century. I agree, Christmas is too capitalistic. Maybe *Christians* should celebrate it differently. Bizarrely, Mr. Martin ends up blaming secularists.

Its time that we return to traditional values, and end this ridiculous charade. It's important that we take a fuller account of WHY we celebrate Christmas, as opposed to falling for the barrage of ads that tell us what is most important.

Parents, don't be so consumed with the notion that your children will have a terrible Christmas because the tree isn't overflowing with gifts. The true love that you show them is more important than anything else.

America might be the king of capitalism, but secularism must never become so prevalent that our religious traditions are discarded.

How is secularism responsible for Christians becoming more capitalistic when celebrating Christmas?!? That's like blaming atheists for the lack of manners exhibited by parishioners when taking communion.

Dumb dumb dumb. Merry Xmas Everyone.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

The word "miracle" gets thrown around a LOT in the media these days. Foxnews.com has a headline screaming the word "miracle" practically every week and sometimes more often. Sadly, CNN and other less insane media outlets frequently use the word as well.

Personally, I define a "miracle" as the occurrence of an event outside the scope of physical possibility. Something that requires supernatural intervention to occur. That may not be the use to which everyone puts it, but clearly when the religious use the word, they mean something that occurs through the supernatural method of divine intervention.

So, it was with the usual expectations that I read the story of the family who were rescued several days after getting lost in the wilderness while hunting for their Christmas tree.

(Please note: If you intend to call me overly-sensitive, hyper-critical, or pedantic about the use of the word "miracle", please stop reading now. I understand that the people below are expressing their relief by means familiar to them. Tough. By continuing, you agree not to get all in my face about this. Especially you, Marc.)

The helicopter pilot put the rescue in accurate and realistic perspective.

"Had he not been moving, we would not have seen him, because the tree line was very dense and he came climbing out of the culvert," helicopter pilot Steve Ward told CNN on Thursday. "We were just very lucky."

The paramedic involved was less accurate.

"The small window of opportunity we had to find them, it was nothing short of a miracle," paramedic David White, who was riding with Ward, told CNN on Thursday.

The hunt, involving dozens of volunteers, helicopters and snowmobiles went on for three days. The family wanted to be found and were active in their own rescue. How is their recovery a miracle? Perhaps unlikely, but requiring divine intervention?

Let's hear from the rescued father.

"When they turned around, man, I was just praising God and saying, 'Thank you, Lord. Thank you, Lord,' because I knew we had made it," he said.

Yes, I love it when the Lord scares the crap out of me by confronting me with the freezing death of my children for three days. Praise Jesus!

"I'm glad I'm home. Praise God," Dominguez told reporters after exiting a chopper at the search command post. "It was awful."

Asked how he survived, he replied, "Jesus Christ."

Because no one has ever survived lost in the wilderness by themselves. No Buddhist, Muslim or Jew has ever come out of such a situation alive.

Butte County Search and Rescue dispatcher Madde Watts said, "They had angels with them, for sure."

Oh, for sure. Unfortunately, Angels appear to be incredibly incompetent, apparently taking at least three days to alert searchers. You'd think they could just fly right up and signal the helicopter but, I know, they don't work that way.

They would have been better off with a Saint Bernard with a keg of cognac around his neck.

Archbishop jumps the shark about halfway through interview

In a recent interview, the Archbishop of Canterbury was refreshingly honest about the Christmas story.

There was scant evidence for the Magi, and none at all that there were three of them, or that they were kings, he said. All the evidence that existed was in Matthew’s Gospel. The Archbishop said: "Matthew’s Gospel doesn’t tell us there were three of them, doesn’t tell us they were kings, doesn’t tell us where they came from. It says they are astrologers, wise men, priests from somewhere outside the Roman Empire, that’s all we’re really told." Anything else was legend. "It works quite well as legend," the Archbishop said.

Further, there was no evidence that there were any oxen or asses in the stable. The chances of any snow falling around the stable in Bethlehem were "very unlikely." And as for the star rising and then standing still: the Archbishop pointed out that stars just don’t behave like that.

Wow. All true and shockingly reality-based. But then he goes off the rails in a big way.

But in spite of his scepticism about aspects of the Christmas story, as told in infant nativity plays up and down the land, he denied that believing in God was equivalent to believing in Santa Claus or the tooth fairy.

"The thing is, belief in Santa does not generate a moral code, it does not generate art, it does not generate imagination. Belief in God is a bit bigger than that," the Archbishop said.

What the heck is he talking about here? Does he even know who Santa is? Santa is all about a moral code. In an attempt to get children to behave, he rewards "good" children and punishes "bad" children. And he doesn't visit your house unless you believe in him. Doesn't that sound exactly like God?

As far as Santa not generating art or imagination, the U.S. Post Office can show him six million letters to Santa annually that contradict that idea. Not to mention the pics below. Sure seems like art to me.

Ho ho ho!

It all makes perfect sense now.

In light of America's recent adoption of a religious test for President (take that, Constitution!), yesterday, Fox News posted 21 questions asked of the Mormons and answered by the Mormons (the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints). The Church's responses are as clear as . . . well, check it out here.

Despite having been given 21 questions, the Church only gives 16 answers. An interesting tactic. The answers they do give are very carefully worded to sound reasonable, while not being inconsistent with some of the church's nuttier beliefs.

For example,

Q: If so, does the Church believe that God lives on a planet named Kolob?

A: 'Kolob' is a term found in ancient records translated by Joseph Smith. Joseph Smith did not provide a full description or explanation of Kolob nor did he assign the idea particular significance in relation to the Church’s core doctrines.

Right. No particular significance. The questions also address the Golden Plates and the Mormon sacred underwear, none of which is nuttier than eating the flesh of Jesus in the form of dry crackers or giving authority over human sexuality to some old, unmarried, celibate guy who wears pointy hats.

Finally!

New Line and Peter Jackson come to terms. Jackson will Executive Produce The Hobbit for release in 2010.

All the details here.

About time!!

No word on who will direct, but presumably Jackson. I'm also not jumping up and down about a "sequel", but we'll see. I can't believe it took this long.

Someone go hermetically seal Ian McKellan in a stasis chamber so there's no chance of anything happening to him before they film the movie.

Earth to Leslie

During last night's Survivor finale, Leslie, the "Christian Radio Host" once again repeated the following statement (paraphrased):

"I''m not a religious person. But I have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ."

Sorry, Leslie, but you can't logically follow sentence number one with sentence number two unless Jesus Christ is a guy who lives in your building or works in your office. If you're talking about the white guy with blue eyes and brown hair who likes white robes, the "Son of God," the "Lamb", "Redeemer", and "Savior" -- THAT Jesus Christ, then, you are indeed religious.

So stop saying you're not. It just makes you seem goofy.

And (spoiler ahead) it should be noted that the very deserving winner was Todd, the openly Gay Mormon. Take that, Utah!

Whatever happened to Urban Pedestrian?

A couple of months ago I switched to using Google Reader to keep up with the many blogs I read. The reader makes it very easy to follow multiple blogs, but you tend not to visit the actual sites much. So, when no new posts from a certain blog appear, you just assume they aren't posting.

I was quite surprised today when I went to check out Urban Pedestrian's lack of recent posts to find that her blog is gone. Completely. No trace.

Urban Pedestrian is a frequent commenter here, a sharp cookie, and writes a very good blog. From me to her, I hope everything's okay and we'll hear from you again soon.

A Christmas Carol?

Last Sunday night I made my annual pilgrimage to my wife's church to hear my daughter sing in the children's Christmas concert. As a rule, I can't go to regular church due to an affliction of excessive eye-rolling, sighing, and head-shaking which seems to be "not in the spirit" of going to church in the first place and "disrespectful" of the believers. But at the concert, there's (generally) no preaching. Plus, I love my daughter so I tough it out.

Between sets by various choirs, the choir director has the crowd sing Christmas carols. Since I view Christmas music as the ultimate contribution of religion to mankind, this is okay, so long as they don't run it into the ground as they have in years past. This year, with the old minister gone, it quickly became clear that we would no longer include any secular Christmas songs but sing exclusively out of the Presbyterian hymnal. No problem.

So the choir director calls for the audience to shout out some page numbers. Someone does and the first song chosen is "In the Bleak Midwinter" by Holst. Excuse me? We then do "Hark, the Herald Angels Sing" followed by another Holst gem, "On this Day Earth Shall Ring". At this point, it apparently became a contest to see who could pick the most obscure Christmas hymn in the book. "Once in Royal David's City" competed with "Lo, How a Rose E'er Blooming". We actually sang "Away in a Manger" but whoever called it out picked the non-traditional version so the melody was completely different. For one song, some parishioner insisted that everyone stand. Oy.

As I sat, bemused and horrified at this weird turn of events, I was reminded of a scene set at a Christmas Party.

Lucy Van Pelt: Say, by the way, can you play "Jingle Bells?"

[Schroeder proceeds to play "Jingle Bells", which sounds like a traditional grand piano]

Lucy Van Pelt: [interrupting] No, no. I mean "Jingle Bells." You know, deck them halls and all that stuff?

[Schroeder begins to play again, with the piano sounding like an organ]

Lucy Van Pelt: [interrupting again] No, no. You don't get it at all. I mean "Jingle Bells." You know, Santa Claus and ho-ho-ho, and mistletoe and presents to pretty girls.

[Lucy gazes lovingly at Schroeder, who then out of frustration taps one key of the piano while playing "Jingle Bells," which sounds like a child's toy piano]

Lucy Van Pelt: That's it!

[Schroeder turns a few unplanned flips from Lucy's reaction]

You know you're in a strange place when you find yourself empathizing with Lucy and wishing you had the vocal power to make someone do backflips away from the piano.

I Hate Baseball. Can I be the coach?

Sheesh.

I lost my job because I don't believe in evolution.

Gee, guy, maybe that's because Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution hired you as a frickin' EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGIST!!

News flash. If I took a job as a priest and then declared I didn't believe in God, I would expect to be fired. Certain beliefs go with the job, you know? It's the same here. You can't be expected to do research into biology unless you actually believe the underlying theory, which, by the way, is scientific fact and not subject to your silly disbelief. So, not only are you an unemployed creationist, but you're ignorant as well. (Uh, maybe that's redundant.)

Holy spirit has really good aim. Timing, not so good.

I am thrilled that a courageous security guard had the presence of mind to take out the psycho was who shooting people at Ted Haggard's old church. She deserves a lot of credit.

Unfortunately and utterly predictably, she wants to give it all to God.

Assam said, "I give the credit to God. And I say that very humbly. God was with me and the whole time I was behind cover -- this has got to be God, because of the firepower that [the gunman] had vs. what I had -- was God. I did not run away and I didn't think for a minute to run away, I just knew that I was given the assignment to end this before it got too much worse. I just prayed for the Holy Spirit to guide me."

Yes, there's no possible way that she could have shot someone by herself. It had to be God. It took divine intervention for her to kill the guy.

Too bad God didn't intervene before the nutjob had killed two teen sisters in the parking lot.

Another word on the Romney speech

Here's a GREAT editorial from the Washington Post about Mitt Romney's speech.

No Freedom Without Religion

I read JFK's speech, Mr. Romney. You're no JFK.

To contrast Romney's speech, check out John F. Kennedy's speech from the 1960 election where he dealt with questions about his religion. I hadn't read this speech until today. I'm not a huge Kennedy fan, but this was an awesome speech.

A few paragraphs (not necessarily consecutive) are below.

I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute; where no Catholic prelate would tell the President -- should he be Catholic -- how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote; where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference, and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the President who might appoint him, or the people who might elect him.

I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish; where no public official either requests or accept instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source; where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials, and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all.

Finally, I believe in an America where religious intolerance will someday end, where all men and all churches are treated as equals, where every man has the same right to attend or not to attend the church of his choice, where there is no Catholic vote, no anti-Catholic vote, no bloc voting of any kind, and where Catholics, Protestants, and Jews, at both the lay and the pastoral levels, will refrain from those attitudes of disdain and division which have so often marred their works in the past, and promote instead the American ideal of brotherhood.

Tremendous. I can't believe how unequivocal, how eloquent, how correct Kennedy's speech is. Everyone who's interested in this issue really should read it in its entirety.

Of course, the sad part is that if Romney said any of these things, he couldn't possibly win the Republican nomination.

Reason # 24 not to vote for Mike Huckabee

'Nuff said.

Here he comes . . .

Here comes Speed Racer! The Matrix's Wachowski Brothers are bringing Speed Racer to the theater next year. Here are just a couple of the pics from SpoilerTV-movies. Man, this looks trippy. Matthew Fox from Lost plays Racer X.



My only question is, why the heck are they racing through Moria?

Mitt Romney's America: Joseph Smith is Out, Jesus is In!

Well, Republican Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney gave his speech today in which he addressed the infamous "M" question. The intent was to put to rest the concerns over his cult affiliation and assure the right-wing that he is one of them. Bizarrely, in a speech about his Mormon beliefs, he only used the word "Mormon" once.

As I suspected he would, he said a few general, positive, things about religious freedom. He also contradicted himself by gushing all over religion. And he followed that by really bringing out Teh Stupid.

(Please note in advance that I did not hold out much hope for this speech. Still, I'm somewhat galled at the level of stupidity, intolerance and pandering that are evident.)

"Today, I wish to address a topic which I believe is fundamental to America's greatness: our religious liberty. I will also offer perspectives on how my own faith would inform my Presidency, if I were elected.

There are some who may feel that religion is not a matter to be seriously considered in the context of the weighty threats that face us. If so, they are at odds with the nation's founders, for they, when our nation faced its greatest peril, sought the blessings of the Creator. And further, they discovered the essential connection between the survival of a free land and the protection of religious freedom."

Ah, those hopelessly religious founders have entered the building. The speech is already teetering on the rails.

"Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone."

Oy. I agree the religion requires freedom, but does freedom require religion? Hell no! Freedom is not about "communing with God" and despite what he says, it is perfectly possible to imagine a free nation not encumbered with religious superstition. Much of Europe is heading that way today. But he'll get to those Godless Bastards later.

"Almost 50 years ago another candidate from Massachusetts explained that he was an American running for President, not a Catholic running for President. Like him, I am an American running for President. I do not define my candidacy by my religion. A person should not be elected because of his faith nor should he be rejected because of his faith."

Notice that he doesn't cover "no faith". So long as you have faith, you're okay. Don't have faith? You don't exist in Romney's America.

"As a young man, Lincoln described what he called America's 'political religion' – the commitment to defend the rule of law and the Constitution."

This is good (of course it is, Lincoln said it), but in the very next sentence, Romney throws the whole idea in the toilet.

"When I place my hand on the Bible and take the oath of office, that oath becomes my highest promise to God."

As President, you don't take an oath to God, you nimrod. You take an oath to THE AMERICAN PEOPLE to uphold and defend the Constitution. I don't want you to pledge to an invisible sky-daddy, but to ME and ALL OTHER AMERICANS. You know, the people you are supposed to protect and represent?

Here's the Oath: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

And then more about respecting faith.

"There is one fundamental question about which I often am asked. What do I believe about Jesus Christ? I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind. My church's beliefs about Christ may not all be the same as those of other faiths. Each religion has its own unique doctrines and history. These are not bases for criticism but rather a test of our tolerance. Religious tolerance would be a shallow principle indeed if it were reserved only for faiths with which we agree."

I am SO glad to know that he thinks Jesus is great. That's just swell. But note that tolerance is reserved for "faiths". He apparently won't even acknowledge the existence of non-believers.

"It is important to recognize that while differences in theology exist between the churches in America, we share a common creed of moral convictions. . . . Whether it was the cause of abolition, or civil rights, or the right to life itself, no movement of conscience can succeed in America that cannot speak to the convictions of religious people."

Sigh. The old "religion equals morality" canard. I suppose it's true just so long as you hate Teh Gays.

"But in recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America – the religion of secularism. They are wrong."

Dickweed. Dickweed. Dickweed. Oh, and he's a douchebag, too, for repeating this right-wing stupidity. Please note that the vast majority of separation cases brought in United States Courts were brought BY CHRISTIANS who were upset that another CHRISTIAN denomination was doing something to favor their denomination. And the idea of a secular "religion" is just stupid. He's pandering here in a big way, which completely shatters that whole "statesman" aspect of the speech.

"The founders proscribed the establishment of a state religion, but they did not countenance the elimination of religion from the public square. We are a nation 'Under God' and in God, we do indeed trust.

We should acknowledge the Creator as did the Founders – in ceremony and word. He should remain on our currency, in our pledge, in the teaching of our history, and during the holiday season, nativity scenes and menorahs should be welcome in our public places. Our greatness would not long endure without judges who respect the foundation of faith upon which our Constitution rests. I will take care to separate the affairs of government from any religion, but I will not separate us from 'the God who gave us liberty.' "

Right. Our Constitution rests upon a "foundation of faith". These statements alone should disqualify this guy from running for President. What can I say about this bunch of nonsense other than call Romney a pandering idiot who has apparently never read nor understood the Constitution?

"Americans acknowledge that liberty is a gift of God, not an indulgence of government. No people in the history of the world have sacrificed as much for liberty."

Wow. Apparently, not only are Americans REALLY religious, but we're also Prima Donnas. Let's look at just WWII. I guess the 5 million dead Poles, half a million dead French, nearly half a million dead Britons (each country lost more people than the U.S.), weren't sacrificing as much for liberty as the U.S. And I didn't even mention the Jews.

Oh and he finally gets around to dealing with those heathens in Europe.

"I'm not sure that we fully appreciate the profound implications of our tradition of religious liberty. I have visited many of the magnificent cathedrals in Europe. They are so inspired ... so grand ... so empty. Raised up over generations, long ago, so many of the cathedrals now stand as the postcard backdrop to societies just too busy or too 'enlightened' to venture inside and kneel in prayer."

Yes, it really sucks being "too enlightened". It can't be because Europeans are moving beyond the need for religion.

"In such a world, we can be deeply thankful that we live in a land where reason and religion are friends and allies in the cause of liberty, joined against the evils and dangers of the day. And you can be certain of this: Any believer in religious freedom, any person who has knelt in prayer to the Almighty, has a friend and ally in me. And so it is for hundreds of millions of our countrymen: we do not insist on a single strain of religion – rather, we welcome our nation's symphony of faith.

"Any believer" has a friend and ally in me. I guess that makes me his enemy. Don't see why I would ever vote for someone who considers me their enemy.

I'll leave it on that note.

A touching tale of woo

Okay, we all know that Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich has a hot wife, Elizabeth. For the record, here she is:



The Washington Post is running a lifestyle story about how Dennis and Elizabeth met and came to be married. The story is cute, but it also shows that both Kuciniches are chock full of ridiculous New Agey beliefs. Really, there's enough nonsense here to make John Edward, Sylvia Browne, and Deepak Chopra proud. And this guy wants to be President? I think we've had enough of reality-challenged Commanders in Chief to last a lifetime.

So click here to read the whole story of their unlikely relationship and be prepared to learn of such wackiness as the involvement of guru Sri Sri Ravi Shankar and Shirley Maclaine, "soul recognition", fortune cookie wisdom, the proposed "Department of Peace", and messages to the universe answered by e-mail.

"I mean, you can't make this stuff up," Dennis says.

Oh yes you can.

The cost of this man's beliefs

As we were recently discussing Jehovah's Witnesses and the cost of religion, here's another example. This poor man has had to endure this burden for decades. I imagine he believes it's a test from his god. What a cruel thought.

Warning: Graphic Images. Click here.

Prediction: The first words out of your mouth when you see these pictures will be either "Oh my . . . " or "Holy . . ."

Here's the background without the pictures.

Rosie is starting to look real good about now

I don't like to call people stupid, but sheesh . . .

During a discussion about the Greek philosopher Epicurus (341 B.C.–270 B.C.), the following debate popped up among a lot of cross chatter:

Whoopi: Keep in mind probably when he was around there was no Jesus going on.
Sherri: No, they had Christians back then.
[Cross talk]
Sherri: They had Christians, they threw them to the lions.
[Cross talk]
Whoopi: I think this might predate that.
Joy: They believed in polytheism.
Sherri: I don't think anything predated Christians.
Joy: No, the ancient Greeks were earlier. It went Greeks, Romans, then Christians.
Sherri: Jesus came first before them.
Whoopi: [Gently, bless her] Not on paper.

Now admittedly, you don't watch The View for intelligent discourse, but COAC! How does someone this ignorant even watch TV, let alone appear on it? [Rhetorical question]

Another visit to Bizarro World

Despite months of Administration rhetoric setting the stage for action against Iran, the U.S. Intelligence community just released a report that concludes that Iran closed down its nuclear weapons program four years ago. Good news!

Unfortunately, the White House has been relocated to an alternate universe, where news that Iran has no active program and stopped the one they did have four years ago is ammunition AGAINST Iran.

"I view this report as a warning signal that they had the program, they halted the program," Bush said. "The reason why it's a warning signal is they could restart it."

"To me, the NIE (National Intelligence Estimate) provides an opportunity for us to rally the international community _ to continue to rally the community _ to pressure the Iranian regime to suspend its program," the president said. "What's to say they couldn't start another covert nuclear weapons program."

He also asserted that the report means "nothing's changed," focusing on the previous existence of a weapons program and not addressing the discrepancy between his rhetoric and the disclosure that weapons program has been frozen for four years.

President Bush on Iran

I view this as a call to arms. Clearly we had better gear up for action against Germany and Japan immediately! What's to say that they won't rearm and invade their neighbors again? And we haven't heard from that Attila the Hun guy in a while. Seems to me like he's up to something. We should also invade the Klingon Empire ASAP. What's to say they won't create themselves and start attacking our colonies and starships?

Wake me up when we're back in our regular universe.

Business as Usual in American Politics

Here's a good opinion piece about Mike Huckabee's failure to act according to his professed beliefs and the role of religion in this election. It's well worth a full read, but here are a couple of choice quotes.

. . . when ABC's George Stephanopoulos asked the former Arkansas governor, suddenly and ominously the front-runner in Iowa's GOP contest, whether Mitt Romney is a Christian . . . he provided the perfect opportunity for Huckabee to make some ringing statement in support of religious tolerance. . . . In other words, Huckabee might have preached. Instead, he said Romney had to answer for himself the question of whether he's a Christian.

. . .

It is absurd that Romney feels compelled to deliver a speech defending his beliefs and that Huckabee does not have to explain how, in this day and age, he does not believe in evolution. But it is singularly appropriate that Romney's speech be delivered at the Bush library. For it is the 41st president's underachieving son who put such emphasis on religious belief -- and has shown us all, with his appalling record, that faith is no substitute for thought. A mind honed on the whetstone of doubt might have kept us out of Iraq.

A couple of weeks ago, McCain was asked by a woman what the Republicans ought to do to "beat the bitch", a reference to Hillary Clinton. McCain didn't correct the questioner, suggesting that referring to a Presidential candidate as a bitch was inappropriate and misogynistic. He didn't elevate the tone of the campaign by making a statement that Senator Clinton was owed some respect. He uncomfortably laughed it off.

Such is the current state of politics in America.

Harry Potter and the Really Long Read - Afterward

So you may have noticed that I finished reading all seven books of the Harry Potter series last month. I started on August 13 and finished on October 26 after 4195 total pages. It went quickly.

The Sorceror's Stone - Aug. 13 to Aug. 21
The Chamber of Secrets - Aug. 22 to Aug. 28
The Prisoner of Azkaban - Aug. 29 to Sept. 9
The Goblet of Fire - Sept. 9 to Sept. 22
The Order of the Phoenix - Sept. 22 to Oct. 7
The Half-Blood Prince - Oct. 7 to Oct. 16
The Deathly Hallows - Oct. 16 to Oct. 26
Reading the entire series in one burst and already knowing the story allowed me to focus on themes, characters and plot threads woven throughout the series, confirming the richness of J.K. Rowling's universe and how much the subject matter matures as the characters do. The Sorceror's Stone is told in almost classic children's literature style, while The Deathly Hallows throws all the previous conventions of the series out the window and deals with death and violence throughout. And yet the consistency of the writing, humor and characters is remarkable.

I read every night before bed and during the day on weekends. I enjoyed the entire experience very much and look forward to visiting this wonderful world and these characters again. Much as I re-read the Lord of the Rings every few years or so, I have no doubt that re-reading the Harry Potter series also will become a tradition for me.

Eight Reasons

The right Rev. Steve Cornell, senior pastor of the Millersville Bible Church in Millersville, Pennsylvania, recently published his "Eight Reasons Why I am Not an Atheist" at the Morning Call. I must admit, his reasoning is completely without flaw. He has our number and there's no denying it. You really should check out his tour de force before proceeding with my meager offerings below.

So, out of respect for his reasoning, here are my:

Eight Reasons Why I am an Atheist.

1. An atheist assigns himself to life without ultimate purpose.

See, if there's no "ultimate purpose" there's no reason for me to get a job or have kids! I can sit on my couch playing X-Box all day! Without an ultimate purpose, I am able to focus on the here and now without worrying about all that "tomorrow" stuff. In your face, responsibility! The other day as I was talking to my wife, I reflected on how freeing it was not to have any ultimate purpose, and if it weren't for all the distracting business of being married, raising a family, having a job and trying to make the world a better place for our children, man, my life would be even more perfect.

2. The atheist must suppress the demands of logic.

This one really creamed me on the LSAT's and is the reason all atheists hate Mr. Spock, that logical (aka Christian) bastard. When discussing things like religion, that spoil-sport "logic" demands that I make cogent arguments and present observable, empirical evidence. Screw that! Here's my proof of no god: Rev. Cornell is a poopie-head! Wheee. Logic schmogic.

3. The atheist has to believe in miracles without believing in God.

I've wracked my brain time and again and cannot seem to come up with a good rationalization for my ability to regrow that arm I lost. I know it's pretty remarkable, but doggone it, I'll be darned if I'm giving God the credit! And when that bus crashed and that little girl was the only one to survive, obviously that was a miracle. Those kind of things can't just happen. But who is responsible for the numerous daily miracles reported in the media (especially on Fox News)? Not god, that's who. Maybe one of the Wayans.

4. An atheist must suppress all notions of morality.

The other day, as I was eating the flesh of some local neighborhood children, I was reflecting on this very point. Atheists have a big stake in keeping this quiet because without morality we are free to commit whatever crimes we like. I mean, what possible consequences could there be except for divine retribution? It's not like there are some sort of "laws" that we must follow supported by a large system of "justice" and enforced by, oh, I don't know, "police" of some sort. Fortunately, as I was reflecting on some recent failures where I wasn't immoral enough, an armored car drove by, distracting me to plan the bank heist.

5. The atheist must conclude that evil is an illusion.

Yep. No such thing as evil in my book. Dahmer? Darwinism in action. Enron? That's capitalism for you. Cheney? That guy's face deserved it. Hitler? A lovable scamp. Evil has to be an illusion or else I'd feel bad about point #4 above.

6. The atheist must also live with the arrogance of his position.

How true! The typical atheist has the gall to arrogantly say "I don't know that there's no god, but the lack of evidence speaks volumes so I don't believe there is. If evidence of god's existence comes to light, I'll consider it." We are smug gits. By contrast, non-arrogant Christians humbly know not only that God exists but that he hates teh gays with a passion. Plus, he's really offended when someone says "damn". Kudos to you, Christians! I should really work on my arrogant tendency to say "I don't know".

7. The atheist must also deny the validity of historical proof.

Yes, I admit that I completely ignore all the voluminous contemporary evidence of Jesus' existence and resurrection. You would think that the newsreel footage of Jesus alone would convince me. But you'll have to provide more than just four videotaped interviews of Jesus to get me to believe!

8. Finally, the atheist must admit that human beings are not importantly different from other animals.

Duh. If I didn't believe this, I wouldn't be able to gay marry my dachshund.

My thanks to Atheist Revolution for raising my blood pressure by pointing out this enlightening article.

Review: No Country for Old Men

I went to see the latest Coen Brothers film yesterday.

You may have heard of some of their previous films, among them Raising Arizona, Miller's Crossing, Fargo, The Big Lebowski and O Brother Where Art Thou?

No Country for Old Men tells a straightforward, very violent and brutal story of murder, crime and greed. The cinematography is gorgeous, the dialogue is sophisticated and real, the acting first rate. This is a challenging, mostly quiet and somber film, which completely, willfully and unapologetically defies Hollywood conventional storytelling. The vast majority of people who see it probably won't get it. Brilliant filmmaking. If you're at all interested in film as an art form, you should see this movie.

Roger Ebert says, "Many of the scenes in "No Country for Old Men" are so flawlessly constructed that you want them to simply continue, and yet they create an emotional suction drawing you to the next scene. Another movie that made me feel that way was "Fargo." To make one such film is a miracle. Here is another."

He's right.

Karl Rove is delusional

This is pretty blatant historical revisionism right here.

Congress, Not President, Pushed U.S. into Iraq War

"The administration was opposed to voting on it in the fall of 2002," Rove said. Asked why, he said: "Because we didn't think it belonged within the confines of the election. There was an election coming up within a matter of weeks. We thought it made it too political. We wanted it outside the confines of it. It seemed to make things move too fast. There were things that needed to be done to bring along allies and potential allies abroad."

Wow. Just wow.

Unfortunately, Rove will be unavailable for future interviews to clarify his position as his pants are on fire.